Powerful: Father of 6-yr-old Sandy Hook victim says gun laws aren’t the problem

This is a powerful excerpt from the testimony of the father of a 6-year-old who died at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Ct. Mark Mattioli says that the problem isn’t complicated but it’s difficult to fix. He says it’s not gun laws and cites Chicago as an argument that gun laws aren’t helping. He says, instead, that the problem is civility and parenting.


(h/t: Townhall)

Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.
  • Kelly60


  • BeyondPolls

    So much for that liberal emotional storyline.

  • ryanomaniac

    So sad. I have tremendous respect for this man. Through all this struggle he was able to communicate the true problems with this issue better than me or anyone else I’ve heard.

    • PatrickHenrysBody

      Very sad. As much as it tore him up inside, he mustered up the courage to tell it like it is. I tell you, the tears were welling up as I watched and listened. Bless that father and bless his son. [email protected] to he|| the sadistic murderer who took the lives of those children and the others. More gun laws will not solve the problem, no matter how “sensible” one thinks they are. A determined criminal will find some other means to effect as many casualties or more. Better security and prevention of incidents through education is the key. Armed security guards in schools don’t need to display their weapons to prove they are indeed armed. Discretion would be exercised. Educate people more to properly identify and responsibly report suspicious or potentially dangerous behavior in people. If there were tighter restrictions that needed to be placed on something, they should be placed on those who are mentally ill. They don’t have to be treated like they have the plague or like they are potential killers. They do need to be treated more effectively and efficiently than they are presently being treated. That’s my opinion on the subject, anyway.

      • bobemakk

        I agree wholeheartedly Patrick. Gun laws do nothing. Criminals will get illegal weapons anywhere, and parents must strongly teach their children right from wrong. This man broke my heart. His mother did the right thing when he stole the gun. Most parents today are not involved in their childrens lives at all. We live in very different times and it has turned out to be an unfortunate situation.

        • PatrickHenrysBody

          Sad but true. The breakup of the family unit and attempts at redefining what a family should be is by design. Morality has taken a back seat to depravity of every kind.

  • anneinarkansas

    An impressive and sincere man. I respect him so very much for his courageous stand.
    Let’s hear more from men like this.

    • Orangeone

      sDee posted this on the Open Thread, well worth the watch!

      I am proud! Want to know the kind of man we need in the immigration line? Listen

      Henson Ong at Gun Violence Prevention Public Hearing – Hartford, CT – 1/28/2013

      • clockwindingdown

        Brilliant speaker, came with supporting evidence, not that the agenda seekers care, they all ready know why they want to remove weapons of opposition…

        • PatrickHenrysBody

          That’s their excuse. That’s their crisis to take advantage of. I fear there will be another shooting worse than Sandy Hook that “spontaneously” occurs, if the gun grabbers do not get their way. That will push their agenda over the edge in their favor.

          • clockwindingdown

            More then likely you are correct. We have seen this regime make crisis, or claim crisis to push an agenda, example; healthcare, now immigration.

            Ignoring real situations and going at things on their list of to do’s, there was virtually no real action to gulf oil spill, all they did was see a chance to make some money. Same with hurricane sandy, make an appearance put on a show.

            For a group that has activist on the ground everywhere they aren’t good at doing much aside from agitating for elections.

            • Nukeman60

              Hey, CWD, just thought I’d pass along that CorpstoCore responded to me today on this thread. He included you in the intro, so I thought you might be interested in reading it and responding as well. Be advised, he thinks we are for big government and we are against individual rights, so just a heads up, it’s a bit wacky. 🙂

              • clockwindingdown

                Projecting is he? Or did his medication wear off?

                • Nukeman60

                  I took the opposite view. I assumed he was just getting on them (with a morning doobie).

                • clockwindingdown

                  There does seem to be an inner struggle to figure out what is going on. Claims to be one thing but says another, maybe he is awaking, or maybe he shouldn’t be taking meds. Definitely some confusion going on there…

                • Nukeman60

                  I’m definitely keeping this thread open. It’s getting interesting. He just responded to me with a quote that (surprisingly) has absolutely nothing to do with my previous comments. I think he just needs someone to talk to. I’ve run across a lot of these types (usually from MediaMatters). I will try to bring him out of the darkness (it’s my basic nature to attempt to save his soul).

                • clockwindingdown

                  You have more patients then I. I can only handle so much of the same questions without comprehension, before I need a break. At some point I will just say I’m done and through with this line. Of course that could be part of the strategy to simple wear one down into submission, I know the left use that all the time in legislation. They keep bringing the same stuff up time after time until they get it through, usually backed by lies…

                  That said if you think of it keep me in the loop, I might renew my efforts…

                • Nukeman60

                  Just remember the number of posts (I think it is 148 right now). If you check back occasionally you can tell the progress, as there are very few other posts happening. Liberals like to post on old threads, because they feel they won’t get the massive response they usually get from current threads.

                  I just get an email update anytime they post, so it’s easy for me, when I’m doing research on the computer or even out and about. They don’t sneak in anything that I don’t see (if they respond to me, that is).

                  It’s kinda fun, but I’m with you, if CtC doesn’t actually address what we said just one time, then I’m done with him.

                • clockwindingdown

                  I’ve noticed the late reply to dead thread thing. Must be a last word on the subject thing, or trolling to see if the ambers are still hot.

                • Nukeman60

                  They like to spew, but they can’t handle the replies. Dead threads are easier for them. Makes them feel a little more powerful in their little lib world.

            • PatrickHenrysBody

              They will go to any lengths to inflict as much damage to our country as they can. All for the sake of ideology, an ideology which is fundamentally flawed, intellectually inept, and bereft of any type of morality.

              • clockwindingdown

                I agree 100%. I had to look up “bereft” excellent choice!

                • PatrickHenrysBody


      • 57thunderbird

        Wow!He nailed it.Sad that an immigrant(legal)has to remind some of us what our 2nd amendment rights were intended for.

        • Orangeone

          Many, many thanks to sDee for finding and posting that video! Yes didn’t he just toss it in there with the LA riots and how the armed Korean business owners stood their ground (when law enforcement ran the other way)

  • I expect HS, IRS, ATF will be auditing this guy for not towing the Democrat line.

  • DoomedNation

    The liberal media will somehow vilify this guy for having an opinion based on the truth instead of the fairy tail they want to feed to the sheeple of the great nation.

    • sDee

      If courage and truth cries out in the forest and the media does not report it, was there a sound?

    • ryanomaniac

      They wont vilify him. Theyre not gonna report the story. The MSM will put this story in file 13.

      • PatrickHenrysBody


  • sDee

    I am humbled. You are a strong man, Mark Mattioli.

  • celestiallady

    I watched this yesterday – and cried. what courage for him to speak his mind.

    • Nitnyline

      I’ve been crying non stop for this man. I wonder if I could be as strong. I hope to never find out. This man is my hero.

  • Thank you Scoop for posting this! This was awesome. God bless this dad- especially knowing his testimony would be “controversial” and yet he said it anyway. God Bless him for it.

    • poljunkie

      Yes Ma’am.

      My husband and I were talking just a bit ago, about how hard it is to raise kids- if you are involved. (We were hard a$$ parents.) But it is so important, not just for your own child…its for the entire community.

      Taking responsibility for ones actions, while at the same time learning to admit your mistakes and actually learning from them is so helpful.

      I wish more people got this. Dont you?

      • You know I do wish more people got this. Unfortunately, when the government is nanny to kids for meals as well as indoctrination- parents who were raised in it have no sense of responsibility to their own. It breaks my heart.

        • Orangeone

          And his point said it all to me, his parents were raised just coming out of the depression and SAID NO to discretionary spending. How infrequent is that nowadays? Gimme, gimme, gimme or I’ll throw a tantrum in the store

  • That’s what this country is about. He is a strong man, by showing up and airing his opinion.

  • poljunkie

    I respect this man and feel for his loss. I hope he finds peace. I don’t know if I would be able to.

    Civility, accountability, and parenting are all important.

    Take it from some one who knows, it is hard to be known as the inflexible parents when it comes to “teenage stuff.”

    Also, in my view, if there is someone in the house with mental health issues, or if you have young children- keep the guns LOCKED up and under your protection.

  • Sober_Thinking

    Civility and common sense… okay. But new gun laws or bans won’t change a thing…

    I feel bad for this man and his family. May God help these folks…

  • badbadlibs

    That poor man, so sad. He has more courage and intelligence in his little pinky then all of the dunces put together, who propose laws that will do nothing to stop murders.
    This man speaks of personal accountability, teaching right from wrong in the home, and all around good morals. Nothing of those things are able to be processed properly in the liberal mind.

    • Orangeone

      And civility. What potus has divided this country and has inflamed racial and class divide? The very one that pontificated over those deceased children.

  • stage9

    Social issues matter, and the Sandy Hook tragedy is why. He’s 100% correct. The sum of our problems is internal not external.

    Like our friend Conniption Fitz said on another thread:

    “Insanity follows where sin prevails.”

    I couldn’t have said it better.

  • Godisright

    Wow! I can’t say much except, listen to this man. Exactly my sentiment.
    The sanctity of life needs to be protected and guns are in the equation, no question.

    • poljunkie

      We’d be a much more refined society…. and stronger— if we stopped accepting that unborn children are killed every day, right in their mothers womb.

      • Marky_D

        Hey Pol! You know that if abortionists used hunting rifles in their ‘trade’ your 2nd amendment rights would be safe as houses!

        • poljunkie

          Hey Marky. Long time no see! How you doin’? ( In my best Joey!)

          Its a sad state isnt it?

          I’m not a fan of killing animals either. I know there are hunters on board here- …and its cool, but…..but….The way I feel is that if you *have* to kill an animal to survive, or at least get by….in order to feed your family, thats fine…but I dont like to kill it for sport.

          • Marky_D

            Yeah, good thanks Pol – hope you and yours are well!

            I largely agree regarding hunting, though I don’t feel strongly about it. I have a friend though that keeps chickens, and he has made his seven year old daughter kill and pluck a chicken because he firmly believes that children need to understand the whole process and not think that food comes from the supermarket. Seemed a bit ”hardcore” to me – but I see his point, most kids (and adults come to that) eat meat without it even registering that the meal was running around free just a few days ago – and I include myself in that criticism!

            • poljunkie

              Oh wow.

              I can see his point, and I absolutely respect the mindset…. but I couldnt do it.

              Well I take that back- I could do it for survival—but I dont need to, so I chose not to.

              I dont eat red meat or similar. Once in awhile I do eat chicken.

              Yes…. I do wear leather…so im not a crazy tree hugger! 🙂

              I know what you (and he are saying) Kids think the “chicken” comes from a package. ha.I’ve hear terrible horror stories about processing plants for chicken, beef and other things.

              What really irks me are those who hunt and kill elephants, or those who take their tusks…They are such magnificent beasts!!!!!
              OR those who kill tigers or other big animals….
              We were in Africa in 2007. Its heartbreaking……

          • Nukeman60

            If it’s easier, consider hunting (eg, deer) as “harvesting”. That’s what most of the sport hunters are doing – harvesting the stock and strengthening the herd by weeding out the excess. Of course, I can’t figure out a way to bluff my way through “harvesting” cows. The farmers get a bit perturbed by that.

            • poljunkie

              HA. Cow Harvesting. Thats funny NM.

              OH I know, My GF and her husband lived in WI and she said the deer population was outrageous and if hunting season didnt occur they would starve because there were just too many. She said it would just make her sick, to see them by the side of the road…..It was horrible.
              I can understand it-

              I really cannot find any justification for the trophy hunting ….. for the “heads” and elephant “foot stools” …that is just too much for me to wrap my head around.

              • Nukeman60

                Oh, I agree with you on that. But many of them are controlled as well to maintain the herds. As to the illegal stuff, however, I don’t see why the poachers can’t be hunted as well as their prey. It would slow the market down just a tad.

                • poljunkie

                  Yep. When we were there Tanzania)… My husband bought a tee shirt that said as much. Its awesome.
                  Sorry it took me so long to respond. We went out to dinner. Yes on a tuesday.
                  Its my birthday! Wooo hoo. Cue the balloons.

                • Nukeman60

                  WooHoo. Happy Birthday! I’d add ballons, but bold and italics is about my limit, lol.

                • poljunkie

                  Bold and italics is great! I will accept them. ☺

                  We went to dinner, which is unusual for us—-ESP for a weeknight. It was surprisingly good. The place has a music theme and is going for a “supper club” feel. They have guitars “on loan” from Fender”. Most notably they had the guitar Stevie Ray Vaughan played at Alpine Valley .
                  It is signed by Stevie, Robert Cray, Eric Clapton, and Jimmie Vaughan.
                  It is selling for $25,000.00.

                  I didn’t get dessert and we still couldn’t afford it.

                • Nukeman60

                  Shoulda forgone the drinks, lol.

                • poljunkie

                  Snort!—No drinks!

                  There was no reply button- so I had to respond here.

                  I emptied my pockets and the 3 pennies, broken key chain (from my sons car!!!), 2012 BB King ticket stub, and 1 piece of Bazooka Joe Bubble Gum wasn’t even enough to get my name in for the “other” guitar raffle.
                  Thankfully someone else was paying for dinner$$$

                • Nukeman60

                  Hey, are you kidding me? That Bazooka Joe Bubblegum is probably worth a fortune. Is it in the original wrapper? 🙂

                  BTW, if you are conversing with someone and you reach that 11 post limit, just leave the thread open with no updates in a seperate window. The post will go to the top of the page and then you can reply. Kind of a neat trick I learned when posting a lot in one thread.

                  (I usually have two TRScoops open at one time – one for responding in a large discussion and one for checking all the other threads being put up. Makes for a busy ‘puter when fb, email and research window are also up.)

                • poljunkie

                  Sadly, the Bazooka Joe is not from the 60’s. BUT it is the original square with comic. If you are really nice, I also have some Cracker Jacks with the toy. Not the dumb toy, a real toy. Or some Fuzzy Wuzzy soap.

                  Oh , neat little trick. Thanks NM.

                  I do the same. email, RScoop, Ace of Spades, LynyrdSkynyrd, Amazon, Telegraph, whateveri’mresearching that day…..I dont do FB though.

  • CorpstoCore

    I’m in full agreement with Mr. Mattioli that the pressing issues are ones within society or to use his examples of civility and parenting. Sadly though how can one expect or hope for civility, when Neil Heslin, the father of another child killed in that massacre who during his 3 minute statement at the same hearing asked why anyone would want such a weapon and someone shouts 2nd Amendment rights shall not be infringed.

    That’s a grieving father speaking, and most people regardless of politics would question any and everything if their 6-year-old child was murdered or died by any cause. For several members of that audience to make that man into the enemy was appalling. You can claim to be liberal, conservative, Republican, Democrat, or even a rock from the planet Mars, that type of disrespect is the same from any source.

    I’m a veteran, highway patrolman, and gun owner, but the person who shouted 2nd Amendment and those who began chanting afterward are just as dangerous and maybe even more than gun control nuts. I do not know either of those fathers, but anyone who disrupts and disrespects the grief of a parent for merely posing a logical and possibly even rhetorical question given what happened to his son are not among the reasons why I still carry shrapnel in my body today for serving overseas to preserve the freedoms of all Americans regardless of gender, religion, race, any question they might have about a semi automatic weapon, or questions about anything else for that matter.

    Whenever you lose someone dear, especially through violence, you will go through stages of blaming or questioning any and everything. Disrespecting that man and his grief are not support of the 2nd Amendment or of the United States of America in my opinion. Too bad that the media chooses to cover either Mr. Mattioli or Mr. Heslin and not both men because both deserve the same degree of respect and sympathy for the untimely deaths of their children.

    • clockwindingdown

      And this kind of reasoning is how we loose our rights. It is the same shut up attitude that pushes forward the lefts agenda. Sorry but if the father brought up the subject of the 2nd Amendment it is fair game, maybe not shouting over him, maybe waiting until he has finished talking.

      I understand what you are saying, but waiting is not something the left does. Remember “never let a crisis go to waste”? Well, that is what waiting does, it silents opposition and pushes through agendas that are forced upon us.

      Better to upset a few than destroy rights of all.

    • CherDash

      He wasn’t heckled. He asked a question and some in the audience answered it. Media edited the video and lied about it.

      • Nukeman60

        Wow, that video tells the whole story. Thanks.

        He asked the question to the audience and the audience was respectfully quiet. Then he states, “not a single person can answer it” and that’s when they spoke up and said “the 2nd amendment”.

        The liberal LameStream really makes me sick. There was no heckling at all.

        • CherDash

          You’re welcome.

    • IOW don’t answer questions just let others make the decisions and answer for you.
      BTW did you only watch the NBC version of that heckling or the full version where it shows him asking the crowd a question?

    • Marky_D

      Well said and you are absolutely right. I have to be honest and admit I caught myself being caught up in politics and ignoring the human angle only earlier today. Here in the UK the government, to save money, are looking at social housing and where a family living in these taxpayer funded houses have a spare room are asking them to move to smaller accommodation or pay a monthly fee. On the radio this morning there was a phone-in / email in show where they were discussing the case of a couple whose small child had died from a brain tumour and who now felt they shouldn’t have to pay the fee as they had turned the child’s room into a shrine. My immediate thought was “the country has gone mad, we’re bankrupt and we now have people claiming housing entitlements for the dead” and typed out a strongly worded email to that effect. Luckily common sense prevailed and I toned down my email before hitting send. I stand by the spirit of my original email, but there’s a time and a place for politics and I wouldn’t have been able to live with myself if my original cutting email had been read out knowing that the mother of the dead child could potentially be listening.

      • CorpstoCore

        My primary point was that media outlets should acknowledge both of the fathers instead of so-called “conservative” media only mentioning the father whose comments would appeal to their followers and so-called “liberal” media only mentioning the father whose comments appealed to their followers. I watched the approximately 1 hour and 15 minutes in its entirety. The comments during his specific time at the microphone were not that bad as I think we both agree. The continuation of the some of the “our right is in the Constitution” chants during the subsequent speakers bothered me more. Sure it is in the Constitution, but I think everybody in attendance knows that.

        Also, I do not believe the 2nd Amendment is a legitimate answer to his question of why. The right to bear arms does not imply a specific weapon, so by citing it as the reason to own a semi-automatic rifle is inferring that particular gun is good or evil and the weapon, not the psychopath, and that is the determinant factor in tragedies such as this one? What I find alarming is that my response on a “liberal” site that Mr. Mattioli makes a valid argument about civility and society being a major issue and deserves mention met with the same tone of disagreement (and even exact phrasing) as my arguments for Mr. Heslin on this site.

        Personally, I feel that if both sides stop grandstanding and creating all of these “what if” style scenarios that the majority of people would find much in agreement in the case of gun safety and reducing violence in society. Instead, both left and right would rather argue so that the common issues are ignored. That’s my opinion and honestly I was personally impacted more in regard to limitations on my own guns by legislation signed by Ronald Reagan with the vague phrase of “cop-killer bullets” being randomly applied than I was during the so-called “assault weapons ban” from 94 to 2004. I’ve been hit both abroad while in the military and in the states as a highway patrolman, feel proud to have served my country, but on this gun control issue today I feel both left and right share the blame in making it political instead of focusing on the human aspects.

        • Nukeman60

          ‘…But I think everybody in attendance knows that.’ – CtC

          Not everybody, apparently.

    • sDee

      There is nothing about the entire exploitation of this incomprehensible loss by our politicians and our media, that is even remotely compassionate, humane or sensitive.

      In fact within an hour of the killings, our federal government and its propaganda media had fully mobilized to exploit them for their statist goals of disarming us, and destroying our rights and the Constitution. The other comments here of how this footage was manipulated to deceive and control public opinion, shows just how deep and corrupt our government has become.

      We have elected a President and Congress, supported by the media, whose design and intent is to shift massive power to themselves by creating, fueling, and exploiting ugly division among American citizens. We live under a corrupt and soulless regime. That is where our anger and outrage needs to be directed.

    • Orangeone

      As CherDash also replied, the video was edited by the media. The father turned to members in the audience and specifically asked them why anyone would need to own the weapon. They replied the 2nd Amendment. Please be wary of the editting of the media, they have become quite skilled at it, think of the “white hispanic” case and the editting NBC did and are now being sued for tens of millions because they put this man’s life in jeopardy with their actions.

    • CorpstoCore

      To blame a lack of civility as a cause should mean that one embraces civility for themselves. As per where I viewed the events, I did not see any network coverage, but watched the live coverage on the local public access station without commentary. Media on both left and right will show only what is of interest to their respective audience. My position is that an individual such as Mr. Mattioli helps to promote the cause of responsible gun ownership. People who are unwilling to respect the grief of another whose son was deprived of life without due process of law by infringing upon his right to speak his opinion are not promoting responsible gun ownership, championing either the 2nd Amendment or the United States. They are insisting that their rights supersede the rights of another.

      People lose rights when they apply those rights only to themselves and not others. We lose rights when we promote some while others not applicable to our cause are disregarded. That’s not confined to either left or right, but may occur on either side or anywhere in between. It’s too easy to blame the other side. When anyone displays animosity, feels threatened, or that they have lost rights because a man speaks about his son being a victim of Thou shalt not kill, and the man speaking is ignored, chastised, and others saying that this man’s feelings are of lesser importance than another whose son was also murdered, where is the civility? No agenda was being forced at that hearing; anyone desiring to speak was afforded that opportunity. People in support of guns were in a clear majority. Parents of children present at this tragedy were merely given easier access to the building.

      I argued in agreement of Mr. Mattioli, and never used the word heckled. My statement was that anyone making a grieving father into the enemy is appalling regardless of the source. Some apparently see that as a negative. Whether Mr. Heslin’s question was rhetorical or he expected an answer makes no difference in my mind. The 2nd Amendment does not answer the question posed. Many people would be better served with a revolver or a shotgun, but for anyone to answer that question they must first listen to the needs of another. When someone argues left or right and then uses the same tactics as the side they claim is the enemy how can someone tell the difference between the two amongst all the smoke? I’ve served in 5 different combat areas starting years ago in Panama and ending in Afghanistan and the key was not a personal agenda but a willingness to sacrifice yourself for the person next to you and believing that they would do the same for you and the next person. To me that’s conservatism and love of country, not caring only about you yourself. As per a real threat to the 2nd Amendment, if it survived the ammunition regulations signed into law by Reagan today’s challenges are merely a drop in the bucket to the changes we made back in 86. “Cop-killer” was just as vague as “assault-weapon.”

      • Nukeman60

        ‘People who are unwilling to respect the grief of another whose son was deprived of life without due process of law by infringing upon his right to speak his opinion are not promoting responsible gun ownership, championing either the 2nd Amendment or the United States.’ – CtC

        Okay, you’ve posted two comments back to back stating the same thing about the Heslin testimony, and I feel you didn’t watch the entire thing. Perhaps you watched only the LameStream version. Perhaps, you’re being deceitful in not telling the whole truth. Either way, here’s the entire video for you to view (the pertinent part comes at the 15:00 minute mark).

        If you actually watch it, you will see that he asks the question of the audience and they remain respectfully quiet. Then he looks around and prods, “…and not one person can answer that question…” At that time people spoke up with “the 2nd Amendment” and “shall not be infringed”. He said “alright” at which time the podium spoke out for people to have “no comments while Mr. Heslin is speaking”.

        If he didn’t want an answer, he should not have prodded people with his “and no one can answer that” because people can answer that but they chose to be respectfully quiet until he egged them on with his misstatement.

        It was also disengenuous for the podium to tell them to not comment when he begged the question and claimed therefore no one could answer it. They should have just said “quiet, please”. This is all a liberal technique to push a point and declare it’s fact because no one is allowed to speak up.

        So stop with your sanctimonious outcry that people were being disrespectful. The media used the word “heckled” and then you played it up here – twice. If you feel it was disrespectful and appalling, that’s your interpretation. But you need to go on the facts rather than misconception.

        • Marky_D

          Yep, you just know the Editor of the NY Times groaned when he realised he was going to have to change the front page headline to ”Gun Nuts Heckle Father of Slain Child” from ”Gun Nuts – Inability to Answer Question from Father of Slain Child, Concede Defeat”.

          • Nukeman60

            Whichever way they push it, you can bet it will be biased. There’s always a bias to be found in every story, if they dig hard enough.

        • CorpstoCore

          A hearing that lasted over 1 hour and 15 minutes, and the entire video is only 17:20. Why not view the other hour with footage from outside the hall and leading into the hall? Perhaps only someone who have lost a child to violence; someone who have had to take the lives of another in 3 of his 5 combat tours; someone who as a highway patrolman has shot and wounded a felon firing into a crowd after robbing a convenience store; someone who has shot and killed a felon who held a knife to the throat of a woman who finds the loss of life appalling and people turning a tragedy into there own political agenda.

          I agree it is a liberal technique “to push a point and declare it’s fact because no one is allowed to speak up.” Sadly it appears that is now a conservative technique as well.

          I never felt Thou Shalt Not Kill was liberal or conservative. Lambaste me for arguing that Mr. Heslin has a right to his opinion and should be afforded the benefit of the doubt because of his loss. It is my opinion that the man has a legitimate reason to ask questions and not simply “2nd Amendment” because a psychopath murdered his children not a rifle. The 2nd Amendment pertains to a right, and not a need for a specific weapon, and by using that as an answer regarding the need for any gun is saying that the gun is good or evil, and not the manner in which it is used.

          What’s really sad is that on another site, someone else also called for me to “stop with your sanctimonious outcry” — the exact same phrase for arguing that Mr. Mattioli made a legitimate argument about gun violence.

          It wasn’t that long ago when the terms liberal and conservative actually meant something different as to ideology and methodology. Going by the striking similarity of your comments here on a “conservative site” and “Luvoflife’s” responses to my support of Mr. Mattioli on the “liberal site” all both terms mean among some today is an excuse to attack the other side and do absolutely nothing but blame messengers instead of the writers of that message or to justify or vilify the sinner instead of hating the sin.

          Nukeman, I don’t believe owning any particular make of gun will assure protection for the owner or his or her family. What I choose to carry is based on the environment and what I believe in my experience will be most appropriate. Luvoflife, banning all guns will not stop violence. A gun is merely a tool, albeit one with much power, which when used correctly and responsibly are of great value.

          • Nukeman60

            ‘A hearing that lasted over 1 hour and 15 minutes…’ – CtC

            What does that even have to do with the brief encounter that you, yourself, were talking about. Brilliant!

            So, I’ve seen all three of your long-winded posts that said very little to the point of the discussion. No one denied that Heslin had a right to speak. No one denied that he justifiably feels outrage at the death of his child.

            What I called ‘sanctimonious outcry’ was your implication that the media-labeled so-called hecklers were not letting him speak. You seem to neither understand that point nor are you capable of reading someone’s post.

            So I will type slower for you, if you need. There was no heckling of the man in that exchange, nor was there an attempt to stop him from speaking. Your liberal fake outrage is misguided. If you want to talk about the other hour of the hearing, then perhaps you should have said something about it to start with.

            Get real.

            Besides me not caring one iota about whether you like guns or feel you are erroneously protected otherwise, it has absolutely nothing to do with the subject you brought up and I responded to.

            Wanna try for a fourth long-winded post that says nothing?

            Btw, if people from different sites (according to you, both liberal and conservative) are saying you are crying out sanctimoniously, then either 1) we are working in cahoots against you without actually knowing each other, or 2) you are actually crying out sanctimoniously on both sites. Which would you think it is? I rarely see liberals and conservatives working together to bring down an innocent poster. But then again, just because you’re paranoid, doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.

            I provided video proof of my statement. Did you do the same? Was there something wrong with the video?

            • Harry1960A

              Wow Nukeman60, you must really be paranoid, insecure, or both. Did you read the initial post by Corps? He talked about civility and responsibility and agreed that gun limitation is not the answer to the violence, and you see that as threats to your conservatism? I see someone who is suggesting that acting like uncaring scums hurts legitimate arguments for responsible gun ownership no matter if you like guns or not. The right to bear arms is not an answer to how or why someone needs a particular weapon. If you believe that, then I would think that you are arguing that the gun is dangerous and not the person using it.

              • Nukeman60

                Your entire argument has absolutely nothing to do with my posts to CtC or to his ramblings back to me, although you sound a lot like him. However, just to make it easier for you, I will explain (and I will type slowly for you, as it appears you need that) You must be liberal, because you appear to have a hard time reading and understanding.

                I replied to his second post, stating that in both his posts he was outraged that the audience interrupted and basically heckled the man’s speech. I posted the video showing that it was not true, that Heslin had asked a question (to the audience) to which they respectfully kept silent. When he followed that up with the statement that “no one could answer the question”, they then did proceed to answer. CtC’s point of outrage was way wrong about what really happened.

                He then posted a third post, rambling on about all kinds of crap (including that I am colluding with the liberals on another site – and you’re calling me paranoid) that was immaterial to the point and I stated as such. Now you are doing the same thing. Either you’re working together or you are just plain ignorant of the conversation.

                At any rate, the point had nothing to do with his service record, gun control, the entire 1 hour and 15 minute hearing, or whether the man had a right to be hurt and angry. Perhaps you should listen to the video yourself. You do realize that a shortened version of the video on CNN was doctored to make it look like they were heckling him and there is just now a new post come up on Scoop that shows that and proves what I was saying was exactly correct.

                Learn to read and understand or just ramble on about the wrong things. Doesn’t matter to me. Your words prove more about you than any rebuke could from me.

                • Harry1960A

                  Perhaps you can avoid your letting your ego dominate to consider this question: If you believe showing civility to another is wrong, how are you different from any liberal?

                  Maybe instead of making enemies out of gun owners by callousness, reliance solely on secondary material instead of reading or viewing primary material to think for yourself, and using a CNN doctored video, the 17:20 minute video, the 1 hour 15 minute hearing, as citations you should watch the entire 15 hours and 58 minutes of the actual Bipartisan task force. There are also 26 minutes of footage on Gun Violence Prevention and Teachers on Gun Laws and School Safety.

                  Keep in mind that CNN, MSNBC, or FOX news will provide cheat sheets to inform people of what their opinion should be, and you will be required to think for yourself and not rely on the attack the messenger approach.

                  Both the live feeds and videos are easily found, but it is sad that not one of the networks either labeled liberal or conservative, or any of the blog discussion type boards for people to trash anyone who disagrees in the slightest with their view had no stories about the event when it streamed live or the on demand videos available from the Connecticut Network. http://www.ctn.state.ct.us/ondemand.asp

                  My students at Hilldale College are being taught to think for themselves, so I would think that people posting under the banner of “conservatism” would be willing to do the same without condescending remarks even to people who are the same side as you claim to be.

                • Nukeman60

                  Paragraph 1: I never said that. It wasn’t part of the discussion.

                  Paragraph 2: Not even relevant to the mistaken assumption CtC made about the 15:00 minute mark of the video, which again, was what I was talking about.

                  Paragraph 3: Once again, never addressed the question at hand (the response at the 15:00 minute mark of the video I provided)

                  Paragraph 4: Makes absolutely no sense to your argument (btw, “no one had no stories”? That’s the way you write? And you’re teaching college? Is that you, SnS?). You’re saying that the live feed wasn’t bothersome, so we should what, believe the doctored video? (besides, it still doesn’t have anything to do with what CtC claimed happened to Heslin).

                  Paragraph 5: How does showing CtC that he was wrong about the video (and providing a link to the said video for his – and your – perusal) have anything to do with not thinking for myself? Now you’re argument is just plain idiotic.

                  Well, 5 for 5. You still didn’t understand what the conversation was about, did you? You ramble and rant about CtC talking of civility and gun ownership, how he feels both liberals and conservatives are twisting the narrative, how I don’t believe one thing or another, all the while never, ever understanding that I was talking about the mistake he made when he believed CNN as they touted the audience as being hecklers at the 15:00 minute mark of the video I provided him for watching. Geesh. Children!

                  Perhaps, you need a little more time at Hilldale (I was going to say Hillsdale, but then I realized you weren’t talking about them), although, the people I know from Hillsdale are rather intelligent, for the most part and don’t make the mistakes you just made in two short posts.

                  Your first post ranted about everything but what I mentioned (I had to go back and reread my post just to be sure we were in the right place, you were so far off). And your second post – well, I just itemized them above – so there you are.

                  I recommend you take English 101, then Constitution 101, then come back and read my post. You may find it had absolutely nothing to do with CtC’s first post and the ramblings thereof. Maybe you can learn something. For your children’s sake, I hope to God you do.

                  Have a nice day, Harry.

              • clockwindingdown

                He also rambled on about things that have nothing to do with the subject. Now you come on and use leftist tactics of attacking the messenger and calling people names like, “uncaring scum”!

                Yes, “The right to bear arms” is a legitimate answer, you may not like it but it is valid as to why some needs XYZ, because they have the right. I know you don’t believe in rights, you made that obvious!

                “The right to bear arms is not an answer to how or why someone needs a particular weapon. If you believe that, then I would think that you are arguing that the gun is dangerous and not the person using it.” That is an incredible leap of ill logic if ever there has been one.

                You not only propose the argument you but you base it on your opinion, that being,”The right to bear arms is not an answer to how or why someone needs a particular weapon.” As you said, “…I would think…” but you didn’t, you believed it to be. The second Amendment never limits what one can own, in fact the opposite, clearly it says, “…shall not be infringed.”

                A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

                infringe |inˈfrinj|
                verb [ trans. ]
                actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.) : making an unauthorized copy would infringe copyright.
                • act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on : his legal rights were being infringed | [ intrans. ] I wouldn’t infringe on his privacy.

                • Nukeman60

                  Well stated, but don’t expect an answer.

                  I believe the account is new and probably made just for hit and runs (there are a few of them popping up here lately), as the terminology implies that. But, if he should reply, his answer may not even approach what you spoke of.

                  Nonetheless, you stated what they have a hard time coming to grips with – the truth.

                • CorpstoCore

                  Sirs Nukeman60 and clockwindingdown,

                  I respectfully disagree with your position on what is an answer to the question posed by the father: The general question was why would anyone need or want a specific type of gun?

                  You argue that a recitation of the 2nd Amendment is a legitimate answer to such a question.

                  My position remains that saying that the government gives us that right is not an answer. I do not believe that a government should be so powerful that it dictates to the people. I believe that We the People are the government and therefore have the responsibility to defend any rights or freedoms we might have. Personally, I have many problems with the government health care laws, and the argument that the health care laws should be accepted without reservation because they were passed by the government would not sway me. While correct, why would a recitation of the 2nd Amendment sway someone asking a question about specific weapons? Passing along responsibility blindly to the government is not what made this country great.

                  I feel that a reasoned argument on defending rights is more appropriate than asserting that we may or we can because the government allows us to do so because what a government might allow today might not be true tomorrow. I’d rather have responsibility in the hands of the people and not promote simply following government without the ability the question. That’s my opinion, and I respectfully disagree with yours that the answer is found in the government and not the individual responsibility of the people to defend liberty.

                • Nukeman60

                  ‘I respectfully disagree with your position on what is an answer to the question posed by the father: The general question was why would anyone need or want a specific type of gun?’ – CtC

                  Number one: Please try to read and comprehend what I say in my posts before you respond to them. This is the internet. You have all the time in the world to formulate a sentence, so please read what I wrote before you respond to something that I did not write.

                  Having said that:

                  First of all, I must say, you and Harry must be brothers, ’cause you make the same lame mistake together over and over again. When are you going to respond to what I actually replied to your comments – that being that the crowd was not disrespectful to the question Heslin posed to the audience. So far, you keep ranting about the things in your first post that I did not address, and it’s getting rather boring now, after 4 posts.

                  How can you possibly respectfully disagree with something I never said? I’m curious as to how you and Harry tie that together. Was last night Harry’s turn, today is your turn and tonight will be SnS’s turn? Interesting, but futile.

                  ‘You argue that a recitation of the 2nd Amendment is a legitimate answer to such a question.’ – CtC

                  Even though I agree with that statement, I did not argue that point at all. Try to address what I did respond to you about. Even though I didn’t mention it, the 2nd amendment isn’t about government rights. It’s about keeping the government from infringing upon our individual rights. Try to stay focused here.

                  I don’t give a rat’s patoot what your position is on gun control, on civility, on how many wars you fought, or how long you worked for the police department in a gazillion different ways. Do you hear me? I don’t care!!!!

                  I responded to you making false accusations and my statements have been subsequently validated by another thread:


                  (Hint: please watch and read before moving on – it may be helpful)

                  If you wish to apologize for that or if you wish to expound more on why you think your accusations were accurate, then please do. Otherwise, I’m not the least bit interested in hearing how many more times you’ve been shot at or who you shot.


                  ‘That’s my opinion, and I respectfully disagree with yours that the answer is found in the government and not the individual responsibility of the people to defend liberty.’ – CtC

                  This statement you attribute to me is exactly opposite of my point of view. Where you got it is beyond me, but I can only attribute it to your lack of cranial aptitude. Most people on this site are for smaller government and for individual rights (myself included in both ideas). You are wandering all over the place here (morning doobie, perhaps?).

                  Please try to make some sense if you are going to waste our time with posting. And try not to put your resume in every post. It takes too long to reread the things that you say each and every time.

                  Thanks. Oh, and don’t forget: read before responding.

                • CorpstoCore

                  When man no longer cares about his fellow countrymen we taste the bitterness which is anarchy. From Douglass Southall Freeman’s George Washington

                • clockwindingdown

                  You sir are asserting and projecting what you think or interpret, clearly not what has been said.

                  “While correct, why would a recitation of the 2nd Amendment sway someone asking a question about specific weapons?”. Um, hello, if you agree (“While correct”) why are you trying so hard to twist things? Do you like to argue? Are you familiar with 2nd Amendment? I know you don’t like it by your constant claim it doesn’t answer the question, however it clearly does answer the question. You see a person is not limited to what arms they can have by the government, only you big government guys think it does.

                  To refresh or maybe enlighten you:
                  A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

                  So you see by supporting the 2nd Amendment, a person has no limits placed on what they may own, nor do they need a reason. Further the 2nd Amendment is for “…the security of a free State,” meaning in itself small government.

                  Off the civility issue you tried to create yesterday?

                  There are better ways of fishing then coming here to Troll…

                • Harry1960A

                  If the right to bear arms is a valid answer, please enlighten as to why the administration of George Washington confiscated weapons from civilians. Also, consider the 27 words of the Amendment. Why were citizens denied the opportunity to vote based on property, allowed to vote only for members of the lower House, and not deemed responsible enough for direct balloting to the upper Chamber or the President and Vice-President. If you deny citizens the opportunity to participate in the new government, why would you arm those very same citizens to possibly enable them to overthrow you?

                • clockwindingdown

                  Why do you leftist always change the subject?

                  Is it because you cannot stand on the merits of your arguments?

                • Nukeman60

                  I think it boils down to them having pre-typed statements (ala morning talking points). If you don’t play along, it looks like they changed the subject because their next statement doesn’t match the conversation.

                • clockwindingdown

                  I believe your on to something there!

                  Always the same tactics over and over… Gets old, but they seem to like be called out for being lefty’s.

                • Nukeman60

                  The guy I’m arguing with right now doesn’t even know what the conversation was about that he is attempting to ream me over. Even said he was from Hilldale (I think he confused that Junior College with Hillsdale – accidentally or on purpose, I don’t know).

          • clockwindingdown

            The correct wording is not, “Thou Shalt Not Kill”, it is,”Thou Shalt Not Murder”!

            • Nukeman60


            • Harry1960A

              Not in the King James Version which probably comes closest to the Vulgate but is admittedly difficult for some to read in today’s world. Most modern versions will replace the Thou with You and Shalt with Shall. Many prefer to read from the most accurate translation as it fosters a reliance upon having to read many of the older documents for yourself to discover changes in meaning. That’s why the College teaches Biblical courses using the King James and not newer translations.

              • clockwindingdown

                Again changing the subject to fit your argument…

              • Nukeman60

                ‘Many prefer to read from the most accurate translation…’ – Harry

                Most scholars like to read from the originals, not any translation, interpretation, or side version. Why don’t you ask them?

                • clockwindingdown

                  Nukeman, that won’t fit their agenda. He is using the same logic they have applied to our laws, case law versus Constitution. First they pervert the subject then they have their way with it!

                  If you keep up using logic someone will end up with spilled milk and tears in their eyes… Then we will see internet bullying laws in the news and you speaking before congress!

                • Nukeman60

                  I’m actually expecting him to come back and argue why I’m for abortion. After all, that’s the way his logic has been working all night. I’m beginning to think someone paid him to just come in and argue (doesn’t matter if it doesn’t make sense – just argue). And then tomorrow, someone else from his group will do it, then someone else still the next night. They will all gather back at MediaMatters to have a fine discussion about it over a glass of Pinot Noir.

                • clockwindingdown

                  Who’s Moms basement is mediamadhatters in?

                  It’s very obvious they take marching orders and have been taught how to disrupt. I guess being a tool is all they have, their choice, they too will suffer the consequences of their actions…

                • Nukeman60

                  It irritates me that they can’t learn, but you’re right, what is consoling is the fact that they will have to suffer right along with everybody else. Their problem is going to be that we know how to survive when their world collapses and they don’t.

                  I can even hear them saying now, “Oh, woe is me. Why didn’t I learn about those evil guns when the conservatives told me. I blame Bush for it”.

                • clockwindingdown

                  “It irritates me that they can’t learn, but you’re right, what is consoling is the fact that they will have to suffer right along with everybody else. Their problem is going to be that we know how to survive when their world collapses and they don’t.

                  I can even hear them saying now, “Oh, woe is me. Why didn’t I learn about those evil guns when the conservatives told me. I blame Bush for it”.”

                  The problem is they are dragging us down with them. If we were not fighting the fall would have happened. Their ignorance affects us too, and that is not expectable!

                  If they choose to fall that’s their business, but they’re not content to go by themselves they have drag the rest of us along! They blame us for not going along, but we have read the book, we know the ending, we don’t want to participate!

                  I don’t get how so many can be so ignorant, it takes very little effort, I mean very little, and they won’t even put that forth. If we end up at the bottom and everyone is suffering due to their choice of ignorance, I for one plan one wearing steel toed boots and dispensing some hard education…

                  Did I say I’m PO’d? This whole thing is self induced by selfish people that can’t think past themselves. They may claim otherwise but when push comes to shove they put themselves first even at their own expense! They vote for a token or a trinket not realizing the actual costs to them. If we could make them understand that their decisions are hurting themselves and to look a bit further down the road we could turn things around…

                  Oh well, have a good night and stay warm and healthy!

      • Nukeman60

        ‘When man no longer cares about his fellow countrymen we taste the bitterness which is anarchy. From Douglass Southall Freeman’s George Washington’ – CtC

        I’m responding here because the thread ran out. I apologize for that. As to your statement, although it is a wonderful quote (I could quote Ben Franklin, as well – “a penny saved is a penny earned”), I wonder if you are ever going to address what I actually said. Or are you here to just bloviate to distract us in useless conversation. Please don’t tell me about your kitten next, I pray.

        If you can’t respond to what I say, I won’t reply to your useless words. It’s pretty simple. I think even you can attempt that, can’t you? No? And you are allowed to carry a gun? Or are you just a mall cop now?

  • are the sandy hook truthers going to call this parent fake?

  • tinlizzieowner

    The whole Sandy Hook argument is a straw man. The (so called) ‘assault weapon’ was left in the car, he killed all those kids with hand guns.
    Don’t worry though the hand gun ban isn’t far behind. 😉

    • MiketheMarine

      Just remember, fellow veteran, that making guns illegal and TAKING them are two vastly different actions. One of them the government can do easily. The second one, I believe, is completely impossible. I’ll stand right at your shoulder on the skirmish line when the federal troops head out to confiscate weapons. We may not win but it will cost them dearly in lives lost and money and time.

      It will be an honor to stand at your side and put rounds down range.

      • tinlizzieowner

        They will come for the registerd guns, first.
        (if you catch my drift). 😉 😉

    • take this with grain of salt
      Seized inside the school:

      #1. Bushmaster .223 caliber– model XM15-E2S rifle with high capacity 30 round magazine

      Content Last Modified on 1/23/2013 8:18:21 AM

      • sDee

        Note that it was not sufficient to write “30 round magazine”? They intentionally added “high capacity” for emotional effect. Like there is such a thing as a low capacity 30 round magazine?

        Note also that they say nothing abut the pistols’ magazine or their capacities.

        We know they are out to take away our AR’s and we know why.

        • yeah, I notice very few state that the 30 round is also actually the standard magazine for the M16 (at least it used to be) and the others are called reduced or something.

        • westernhunter

          The left is very good at there word games. Take for insistence the use of “Assault Rifle” . Most people probably think the “AR” in AR-15 stands for assult rifle when in fact it stands for the maker of the rifle. i.e. Armalite

      • tinlizzieowner

        I stand corrected. First reports said the AR-15 was in the car and never mentioned a shot gun.

        • yeah it was the picture near the trunk that had everyone, including me, wondering. then media misreporting everything did not help.
          I’ve been trying to nail that down for a bit myself and found that link posted at twitchy by someone today.
          so don’t feel bad 🙂

          • tinlizzieowner

            This is the first I heard anything about a shot gun? Of course that doesn’t fit into the (so called) ‘assault weapons’ mantra, so I’m not surprised. 😉

    • Orangeone

      7 round magazine law in NYC took care of the semi-autos…

      • tinlizzieowner

        Max. capacity 5 round revolvers will be next. Of course there are a few of them around and I wouldn’t mind having one. 😉

        • Orangeone

          That will leave a mark! I don’t think I could lift it let alone fire it.

          • tinlizzieowner

            I’ve got an S&W .44 mag and that thing in the video is an even bigger piece of ‘hand artillery’. That sucker will drop a Hippo with a couple decently placed shots. 😉
            Just for reference, the bullets are about the same size of a double A battery.

  • PJRodman

    Parenting and dealing with the insane. Anyone in education knows the incredible amount of crap the system has to provide to keep kids with the new alphabet soup of disorders “safe” – to hell with the other 37 kids in the class’ “rights” to not have to wonder if Johnny’s IEP and Behavioral Plan will keep him from stabbing them with a pencil today.

    It has gotten out of control. I agree that the answers to fix it are complicated…but seriously, loonies and totally violent misfits have more rights in the current system than the “law abiding” and civil student. My DIL was body slammed by one of the darlings the other day in the class room, so I am a little prickly about the subject.

    • Orangeone

      And the educational system is now humiliating a 5 year old for a paper gun, suspending elementary school children for playing cobs and robbers all the while black on black crime in Chicago, DC and Mpls is ignored and guns are blamed.

    • Amy

      Having been body slammed by a couple of the little sweeties myself, I can totally give your post a thumbs up. I don’t know which I found more frustrating – the teacher who consistently tried to push a diagnosis of ADD/ADHD/ODD/PDD/Aspbergers for the kid she couldn’t keep quiet – or the system that pushed what might have been a good teacher to the point that medicating every boy seemed like a good idea…

    • Orangeone
      • PJRodman

        OMG…I hadn’t seen that story. Seriously, one of the kids she deals with is every bit as crazy as that one.

        • Orangeone

          I actually found this on Bing searching for the one I saw in a tweet but haven’t found it yet. Our mental health system is broken, children are deemed ADHD and drugged because parent(s) won’t properly raise and discipline them.

          This would be no surprise to people on this site that know I don’t hold back, but I had said to moms chatting on their cell phones in stores and ignoring their children to hang up the [email protected] phone and communicate with their children. And frankly I don’t care about the stares.

          I’m so sorry your friend has to deal with this, what a shame that she dedicated her profession to educating and receives this for her effort.

          • PJRodman

            We are a family of educators…it’s my future daughter in law I’m talking about now. I worked for Indiana Rehab years ago as a living skills instructor. The mental health facilities were basically emptied and closed and everyone was scrambling to “assimilate” people into society. It was basically just another very expensive gov’t boondoggle. I do hope that some were truly helped. Many were like this boy…not fit for society. We kept them drugged to the gills and occasionally had to call the law in because we were not allowed to subdue….same with teachers.

  • clockwindingdown

    Mark appears to be logical, he gets it.

    Mark should consider running for a public office. Someone that thinks versus reacts serves society much better then those with agendas or emotional reactions.

  • sjmom

    Mr. Mattioli, how right you are. I would only add the govt isn’t interested in solving the problem but controlling the population. Thank you for speaking out and may God be with you and your family.

  • sue-marie

    Wow…that was a hard testimony to get through. I had to pause it just to get myself back in check. Whoaa! Anyway…parenting and civility was once a common occurrence in America. What happened? Progressives are what happened. Disagree? There is nothing else that entered society but progressivism that is now on the scene boiling rapidly that was only simmering since 1913.

    • Orangeone

      YOu are correct! And we have the most divisive potus in the history of the country, spewing his racism, his classism and blaming the Constitution because it prevents his tyrannical takeover. Kids are watching him and mimicking his rage!

  • Marky_D

    Wow. Powerful stuff. What a good man and a great parent – he totally gets it. You just know his son was never going to turn into the sort of monster these gun laws are “supposed” to prevent. Good parenting and a prevailing culture that recognises right from wrong is the answer. RIP James.

  • meanwhile nbc editing stuff to make it look like one father getting heckled.
    hard to deal with.
    thanks for posting this RS.

    • Amy

      I saw that… They really are worse than communist era Soviet media – no one is forcing them to spew the talking points they do so because they truly believe this BS.

  • The reason we have all heard about Newtown is because a mother taught her emotionally disturbed, sociopathic son how to use guns and carelessly allowed him free access to them. How in the future can we prevent this from happening again? Liberals don’t want to take all of your guns. We know how important they are to you. We want to prevent what occurred in the Lanza family from repeating itself in another family. And, for God’s sake, don’t let sociopaths have access to firearms.

    • the reason we have newton is cause a psycho killed someone, took weapons, killed others.
      thats it.

    • Nukeman60

      Yeah, she ‘let him have access’ by being killed by him. She shouldn’t have done that. Bad conservative, bad.

      Perhaps, if the liberal media didn’t glorify these shooters, we wouldn’t have a rash of copycats soon to follow each one. And if he hadn’t found the gun, he would have found something else. So the liberal logic moves ever onward.

    • 57thunderbird

      Our guns are as important to you as they are to us.Think about it.

  • williamm



    • stage9

      Ain’t that some junk!

      “Exempt were “authorities of the Reich” and various government entities.”

      Feinstein Gun Control Bill to Exempt Government Officials

      Tell me this wench isn’t using the Nazi plan as a model for America!

      “special provisions (in Germany) were adopted for hunters (to carry guns)…”

      Do you think liberals are talking about using guns only for “hunting” is by mistake?

      “Dealers kept acquisition and disposition books which where subject to police inspection on demand.

      “Within a decade, Germany had gone from a brutal firearms seizure policy
      which, in times of unrest, entailed selective yet immediate execution for mere
      possession of a firearm, to a modern, comprehensive gun control law. Passed by a
      liberal republic, this law ensured that the police had records of all firearms acquisitions (or at least all lawful ones) and that the keeping and bearing of arms were subject to police approval.”

      Adolph Hitler was named Chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933. The
      Nazi regime immediately began a campaign to disarm and obliterate all enemies of the state, who were invariably designated “Communists.”

      • KenInMontana

        Hey now “wench” is a time honored and respected profession, unlike “Senator.”

  • Ray

    The problem in these cases is NOT civility, it is the use of psychotropic drugs that warps the mind of those who perpetrate them. The fact that they are allowed to roam the streets instead of being institutionalized. THAT is one of the problems that Reagan left us, along with No Fault divorce which also contributes to the problems boys without fathers creates.

  • Nukeman60

    ‘…cultivating character – we as parents, that’s our primary job…’ – Mattioli

    That is the most important phrase in that video. That is what all parents should do. That is what he was doing with his son when that boy was ripped from his heart. He gets it, I know.

    There are parents in the inner city of Chicago that don’t even know what that phrase means, let alone wonder where their kids are, late at night, out on the mean streets of Chicago, gun in hand and following a gang. A child who may well be dead tomorrow.

    Newtown is a tragedy, moreso because so many young children died. But Newtown is a rare occurrence, when a wacko goes off the deep end and goes on a rampage. We need to find out how to stop these crazies. Destroying the 2nd amendment isn’t the correct way, although it is the knee-jerk, jump off the cliff before thinking way.

    There are pre-born children murdered every single day in this country, supported by the law, funded by the taxpayer, with a nod and a smile from Obama – to the tune of well over a million each and every year now for over 40 years and counting since Roe vs Wade. It disgusts and horrifies me.

    No one cries out about it. It is quietly and silently performed in back rooms of abortion factories such as Planned Parenthood. They should be renamed Planned Genocide. The LameStream says absolutely nothing about it. It doesn’t sell newspapers for them. Even those of us that hate it so much find that we are forced to do nothing when what we should be doing is taking up arms against the lethal destruction of our future generations.

    Yes, Newtown was a tragedy and I mourn for all those lost children. I mourn for their broken families, rent asunder by a Maelstrom that will never allow them to heal. But it is no more tragic because 20 were murdered at one time than it is for it to happen to millions and millions, one single baby at a time.

    We need to find a solution to both the mass murder and the individual murder. I suspect that the solution to both is one and the same – cultivating character.

    God forgive us our transgressions and give us Light.

  • 57thunderbird

    God bless you sir.May the peace of God fill your heart and may the light of his countenance shine upon you.What a courageous and upright citizen.Very well said.Brought me to tears.Too bad the MSM will bury this story.

  • NJK

    The problem is also a so called President who’s associated with people who may have orchestrated this event, like William Ayers and the Muslim Brotherhood. They should be investigated for their possible ties to this. I know it’s uncomfortable to think of the possibility, but considering they orchestrated Fast and Furious, it’s not out of the realm of possibilities. I believe in my gut and my heart that Obama and all of his ilk, orchestrated the shootings in AZ, CO, and CT. I think out of desperation they resorted to murdering children for their evil, sick, anti American agenda. Ayers has ties to OWS and the so called Arab Spring. It’s not out of the realm of possibilities that they recruited mentally unstable young men to orchestrate these shootings. The hard drive of the CT shooter was destroyed, and they couldn’t obtain evidence from it. Why would he go to the trouble of doing that, unless he was told to do it, or someone did it for him. How many of these parents even voted for the monster occupying the White House? The monster who may have had a hand in the murder of their own children.

    Five years ago, I never would have believed it possible that a so called President of the United States could have a hand in this. Obama is not your average run of the mill President. Doubts remain today about his birthplace, and everything else.

    In the words of John Dodson when they protested letting guns walk into the hands of criminals in Mexico:

    Speed up to 4:31

  • NJK

    Smart man. God Bless him and his son. It’s a shame Zero and his ilk are using his son and other children for their Anti American Agenda. I hope to see the day, Zero pays for what he’s done.

    • tinlizzieowner

      With any luck, his ’72 virgins’ will look and act just like his ol lady. 😉 😉

  • tinlizzieowner

    Don’t think for a moment something like this can’t happen again.
    ‘The Battle of Athens Tennessee. 1946’.
    “The right to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT be infringed”.
    A bunch of civilians are no match for combat veterans when things go into the toilet, no matter what they might think. 😉

  • white531

    Forgive me, but I can’t watch this. I have read your comments, and I understand this man has far more moral strength and courage than I do, to talk about this tragedy. God bless him.

  • JohnCraven

    I think Mr. Mattioli is a hero and very courageous for speaking out as he did with the utmost civility.

    I pray for the repose of the soul of his wonderful son.

    John Craven
    New Orleans

    We are today before the greatest combat that mankind has
    ever seen. I do not believe that the Christian community has
    completely understood it. We are today before the final
    struggle between the Church and the anti-Church, between
    the Gospel and the anti-Gospel.
    (Karol Cardinal Wojtyla, during 1976 visit to the United States)
    [cited on Wall Street Journal editorial page, Nov. 9, 1976, as cited
    by George Weigel in Witness To Hope and Fr. Andrew Apostoli
    in Fatima For Today on page 218 quoting New York City News]

  • Guppymonster

    Truly a moving experience listening to that man and hearing his grief. It breaks your heart but even he understands we don’t need more gun laws which won’t be enforced any more than our government has a desire to enforce current immigration laws. Yet our president hides behind a group of small children and tells us what we must do to avert further tragedies. Of course, during his first term he used people in white coats, doctors if you believe him, I don’t. He also used people dressed as nuns, if you believe him to further his obamacare or any left wing effort hehappens to be promoting.

  • Harry1960A

    Not in the King James Version which probably comes closest to the Vulgate but is admittedly difficult for some to read in today’s world. Most modern versions will replace the Thou with You and Shalt with Shall. As an institution we teach from the King James as it fosters a greater desire to read into many of the older documents in relating one’s faith when challenged by others.

  • Harry1960A

    If the right to bear arms is a valid answer, please enlighten as to why the administration of George Washington confiscated weapons from civilians. Also, consider the 27 words of the Amendment. Why were citizens denied the opportunity to vote based on property, allowed to vote only for members of the lower House, and not deemed responsible enough for direct balloting to the upper Chamber or the President and Vice-President. If you deny citizens the opportunity to participate in the new government, why would you arm those very same citizens to possibly enable them to overthrow you?

  • Ray

    What a brave patriot, he has to go back to Sandy Hook with those libs there.

  • A brave and wise man. We should all honor him and respect what he says. Despite men like him, America is doomed. Study history. Study Germany in the 1930’s. No nation can survive such a high level of ignorance, corruption, inner conflict and immaturity. If America were the Twin Towers, the planes have already hit, the fires have already raged, now the collapse is almost complete. Chaos, violence, oppression and more and more destruction are America’s fate. Get out if you can. Good luck to everyone.

  • Dear Mr. Matioli, You are correct about the primacy of parenting. In that role, moms and dads provide all types of safety: they make the child feel safe emotionally by not criticizing and by providing unconditional love. The good parent clearly provides physical safety which may involve a responsible gun safety box and training. It may be enough to put security barriers around the child at home and at school, which includes an armed security officer. As for civility however, this is too idealistic. The presence of a civil, adult and enlightened culture is a function of how toxic or nourishing our cultural environment is. This comes from our nation’s beliefs about itself and what it how fearful this environment is. A child’s subconsciously held traits are formed in defense of his or her experiences from the last tri-mester of mom’s pregnancy through the age of 7. Our nation’s subconscious is always changing depending on how civil we are to each other. Your ideal of a civil would come from a news environment reporting that we are mostly living in a civilized world. Feelings follow behavior or as the Jesuits taught me, “Act as if you have faith and faith will be given to you”.

  • kong1967

    “civility and parenting.”

    BINGO! Notice how violent crimes in liberal run cities are much higher than anywhere else? Get your welfare liberals to parent their kids instead of just pop them out to collect the money.